There is some case play where the ruling used to be DD, then was switched to Travelling, then back to DD (or the other way round).

Same idea here.

This can't in any way be considered a fumble because he threw it into the air, as opposed to an "accidental loss of control."

The OP isn't a fumble either because the player was never holding the ball.

The word "fumble" is irrelevant.

NFHS history lesson: the air dribble = deliberately batting the ball into the air repeatedly while moving down the court.

Adam has been correct throughout this thread. The BigCat should listen to him.

I've posted about the "air dribble" on this forum before. It was removed back in the 80s, I believe. Consult the NFHS Handbook for the exact year.

At the present time a dribble must be pushed to the floor before the player may touch the ball again. This is how the NFHS made the air dribble illegal. If the ball is not permitted to strike the floor, then the action has not met the definition of a dribble and is BY DEFINITION an illegal dribble. This action is not a travel.

The Case Play mentioned by Bob is 4.15.4 Sit D. Notice that it is back in the section entitled "Dribble - Legal and Illegal Movement."

That case play starts with the player already dribbling and then hitting it again--obvious illegal dribble. Adam and I (and Bob) were discussing the OP where the ball never hit the floor. i was contending that by the dribble definition and when it says it starts in book that if the ball didn't hit the floor at least once it was never a dribble and thus couldn't be "during a dribble" as required in 4-15-2.

Longhorn then shifted the thred and i figured it out…and acknowledged that this OP was likely an illegal dribble as Adam originally said. i came to the conclusion that a dribble really starts when the ball is released or intentionally batted. if you hit it again before it hits the ground --illegal dribble in violation 4-15-2. if you run and catch it in air before hits it is travel. sometimes you have to wait and see what happens next before you know if the original bat/throw is part of a dribble or pass.

As far as listening to Adam goes, that's good advice IF you mean i should consider/think about hard/discuss seriously what he says. i think i did that..and try to do it with everyone. if however, you mean i should accept what he or anyone says blindly without thought/discussion that's bad advice.

I think you're about 50 years off....but close enough for this discussoin. :D

I can assure you with 100% certainty that this is not what he meant. :D

Had a play this afternoon right in front of me where a girl caught a pass on a fast break, fumbled it , regained control and laid it in. The ball never hit the ground and the fumble about about the free throw line. I was Lead tableside, and the bench right next to me goes crazy wanting a travel. I shake my head and give the "no control" signal, and then Center comes from 50 feet away calling travelling. Thanks bro. Then at halftime Center gave me a lecture about using "unofficial" signals and how he only came cuz he was 110% sure. I smiled and didn't say anything back. On to the next game!

Center, we got two problems here. First, you're wrong. Second, even if you're right when you make that call from there you make us both look bad.

He's a state finals guy, I wasn't about to tell him to stay the F out of my area. Smile and wave boys, smile and wave!

I realize that it is "unconventional" ball handling which occurs on the infrequently observed "running bobble" by A2 or other A# as you,ve described but we have Nothing. So, although a ref may cognitively know that A# purposefully utilized the "running bobble" to obtain offensive advantage ie men s rea, we still have Nothing. Play on.

I have worked about a dozen State finals myself and would not have told him to stay out of my area because I do miss stuff and need help on occasion, but I certainly would have told him that he was wrong and opened my Case Book to show him the ruling.

I'm beyond worrying about hurting someone's feelings when that person comes into my PCA and makes an incorrect ruling.

That's a different play, with a different ruling.